Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Uncategorized

Hairy Red Pittosporum

By

Pittosporum.jpg

For the sake of appearance, colour can make a world of difference. In tropical rainforests, a bright upper canopy, rich in blue and UV, and a dark understorey, rich in green and orange, contrasts two distinct light environments.

When discretion is important, bright greens blend better in the upper canopy, whereas dark browns have the advantage in the understorey.

When advertising an invitation to treat, as it were, bright blues glow advantageously in the upper canopy, whilst yellow and red signals optimise conspicuousness in understorey. The Hairy Red Pittosporum P. rubiginosum ssp. Wingii, of Australia’s tropical rainforests, is an excellent example of the latter.

Greenpeace Steals Whale Meat?

By

On Thursday the ABC ran a story from Greenpeace entitled Greenpeace says whalers stealing meat
by North Asia correspondent Shane McLeod:

In Japan, environmental group Greenpeace says it has uncovered evidence of widespread theft of whale meat from the country’s scientific whaling program.

Greenpeace has intercepted a box of whale meat it says was illegally taken off the the whaling ship the Nisshin Maru by a member of its crew.

Spokesman Junichi Sato says the meat could be worth thousands of dollars on the black market.

“This is the valuable part of the whale,” he said.

“It’s made into whale meat bacon, which has a high value.”

The whalers responded with a media release ‘NISSHIN MARU CREW GIVEN WHALEMEAT FOR FAMILIES’:

Nisshin Maru crew members are given a certain amount of whalemeat to take home to their families, Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha in Tokyo, Japan, said today in response to Greenpeace Japan claims.

“The gifting of whalemeat to Nisshin Maru crew members is a time-honoured tradition in recognition of the hard work these men do spending many months a year away from their children and wives,” the President of Kyodo Senpaku, Mr Kazuo Yamamura, said today.

“Our sailors spend four months of the year away from their families and are attacked by environmental terrorists while working, so providing a gift of whalemeat for them on their return home is just a little extra we can do for these men.

“It is a sad day when Greenpeace denigrates our crew for being given a few kilos of whalemeat,” Mr Yamamura said.

Then the ABC reported in an article entitled Company accuses Greenpeace of whale meat theft on May 17, 2008, that it might have been Greenpeace who actually did the stealing:

A Japanese trucking company has told police that Greenpeace Japan has stolen whale meat, a day after the conservation group accused whalers of embezzlement.

Seino says a box of cargo was taken by Greenpeace from its branch office in the city of Aomori in north-east Japan.

Climate Change and the Commercial Fishery (Again)

By

I posted a graph from L.B. Klyashtorin via Walter Starck on May 4, 2008, with comment from Walter that “I have never seen a more succint and telling argument to refute carbon dioxide government climate change”.

The graph though was not of the highest quality, and so Louis Hissink has had it redrawn:

fish n climate copy ver2.jpg

The original post is here: https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/003005.html
Thanks Louis for the better quality graph.

Why Stop a Debate?

By

“People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues.”
George Will, in reference to climate science

via Fred Singer.

Battle of the Blogs: Do Observations Falsify IPCC Projections?

By

In the blue corner we have Roger Pielke Jr (Prometheus) and Lucia Liljegren (The Blackboard). In the red corner we have James Annan (James’ Empty Blog) and Gavin Schmidt (RealClimate).

Interestingly, all four of the contenders accept the the IPCC consensus view on climate change, but Pielke Jr/Liljegren show that IPCC projections are currently falsified by observations, whereas Annan/Schmidt have the opposite view. Read the various blog posts and make up your own minds.

Lucia Concludes:

The IPCC projections remain falsified. Comparison to data suggest they are biased. The statistical tests accounts for the actual weather noise in data on earth.

The argument that this falsification is somehow inapplicable because the earth data falls inside the full range of possibilities for models is flawed. We know why the full range of climate models is huge: It contains a large amount of “climate model noise” due to models that are individually biased relative to the system of interest: the earth.

It will continue to admit what I have always admitted: When applying hypothesis tests to a confidence limit of 5%, one does expect to be wrong 5% of the time. It is entirely possible that the current falsification fall in the category of 5% incorrect falsifications. If this is so, the “falsified” diagnosis will reverse, and not we won’t see another one anytime soon.

However, for now, the IPCC projections remain falsified, and will do so until the temperatures pick up. Given the current statistical state ( a period when large “type 2″ error is expected) it is quite likely we will soon see “fail to falsify” even if the current falsification is a true one. But if the falsification is a “true” falsification, as is most likely, we will see “falsifications” resume. In that case, the falsification will ultimately stick.

For now, all we can do is watch the temperature trends of the real earth.

World Wildlife Populations ‘Plummeting’

By

Between a quarter and a third of the world’s wildlife has been lost since 1970, according to data compiled by the Zoological Society of London.

Populations of land-based species fell by 25%, marine by 28% and freshwater by 29%, it says.

Humans are wiping out about 1% of all other species every year, and one of the “great extinction episodes” in the Earth’s history is under way, it says.

Pollution, farming and urban expansion, over-fishing and hunting are blamed.

BBC News Website: Wildlife populations ‘plummeting’